'Power Plays Plus Push': Experts' Insights into the Development and Implementation of Active Tuberculosis Case-finding Policies Globally, a Qualitative Study

Objective: To explore experts' views on factors influencing national and global active case-finding (ACF) policy development and implementation, and the use of evidence in these processes.

Design: This is an exploratory study based on semistructured expert interviews. Framework analysis was applied.

Participants: The study involved a purposive sample of 39 experts from international, non-governmental and non-profit organisations, funders, government institutions, international societies, think tanks, universities and research institutions worldwide.

Results: This study highlighted the perceived need among experts for different types of evidence for ACF policy development and implementation, and for stakeholder engagement including researchers and policymakers to foster evidence use. Interviewees stressed the influence of government, donor and non-governmental stakeholders in ACF policy development. Such key stakeholders also influence ACF policy implementation, in addition to available systems and processes in a given health system, and implementers' motivation and incentives. According to the interviewees, the World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for systematic screening face the innate challenge of providing guidance to countries across the broad area of ACF in terms of target groups, settings and screening algorithms. The guidelines could be improved by focusing on what be done rather than what be done in ACF, and by providing examples. Leadership, integration into health systems and long-term financing are key for ACF to be sustainable.

Conclusions: We provide new insights into ACF policy processes globally, particularly regarding facilitators for and barriers to ACF policy development, evidence need and use, and donor organisations' influence. According to expert participants, national and global ACF policy development and implementation can be improved by broadening stakeholder engagement. Meanwhile, using diverse evidence to inform ACF policy development and implementation could mitigate the that might otherwise disrupt and mislead these policy processes.